The Union's strategy for reducing emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) andother greenhouse gases is based on a concept known as 'the bubble'.

Under this system, 15 different national emissions reduction targets willbe combined to meet the overall EU goal.

This means, in practice, that while some EU member states, notably the UKand Germany, will have to make very large cuts, others will be permitted toincrease their levels. The four Union countries which are currently in thisposition are Spain, Portugal, Greece and Sweden.

The three southern states, all major beneficiaries of the Union'smulti-billion-ecu structural funds, have been given permission to increasetheir emissions because rising levels of greenhouse gases are seen as anunavoidable consequence of economic development.

As people buy more cars, and new factories and businesses open, theargument goes, emissions are bound to grow.

Indeed, the only reason Bonn was able to pledge to cut its emissions by 25%was because of economic collapse in the former East Germany.

However, environmental groups argue that the southern states are taking tootraditionalist a view of the emissions question.

"I think it is a pity that they are planning to raise their output ofgreenhouse gases," said John Hontelez of the European Environment Bureau(EEB).

"The southern states should use their existing lower levels as anopportunity rather than seeing emissions reduction as a burden."

Hontelez and other green campaigners say the southern member states shouldbe encouraged, possibly through a more targeted allocation of structuralfunds, to invest in new 'clean' technology and try to avoid the sorts ofenvironmental traps more developed states have fallen into.

"If you think less cars per capita is a sign of underdevelopment, then youdon't understand what the future will be," said Hontelez.

Sweden's case is different. Stockholm has been given permission to increaseits emissions because it has chosen to close down its atomic power industryand replace nuclear reactors with coal-fired power stations.

This poses something of a problem for the environmentalists. "We applaudthe closing down of nuclear power stations, but it is a shame they are notlooking towards renewable energy sources," said one green campaigner.

The atomic power lobby points out, however, that the only installationscurrently capable of producing the amounts of electricity needed to meetthe country's energy requirements are either nuclear reactors or powerstations which burn 'dirty' fossil fuels.